I realize this response is three days late, but how you could infer from the post that because of free agency problems under Millen the team would have the same problems under Mayhew is beyond me when I mentioned neither Millen nor free agency (nor Mayhew for that matter).

Instead, I meant to highlight that going in, there was an obvious weakness of the team - the secondary - and they could have addressed it in the second round. The appeal of addressing this through the draft is that it is almost guaranteed the player will be on your team next season. IMO drafting the best available is a strategy that works great for the first round or when your team does not have a huge weakness.

It is quite possible that the team can address the issue in free agency. However, the team's top DB targets in free agency may get offered more money elsewhere or may not want to play for the Lions. Free agency is a riskier option to address team needs, and when one is as big a need as the Lions have, I would have preferred the guarantee of the draft.

It's a nice story and all, and I welcome him to the team. However, what are the stats on the #1 and #2 cornerbacks last year? You cannot tell me it is less than or equal to the weakness of the 21 combined receptions for the #3 and #4 receiver.

Isiah Thomas covertly offering advice and guidance to an owner who gave him an extension for ruining the franchise is a far-fetched idea to you.

However, in the comment you made before this, the theory that an SEC team receiving sanctions would result in a secession of the SEC from the NCAA, forming an "unregulated football super alliance" seems plausible to you?

I was in the same situation after my first year. I thought law school would be interesting and make me a more well-rounded person for whatever job I decided to pursue, and I was hoping to do something in the public interest sector.

However, I seriously considered leaving. Among other reasons, I hated focusing on the academic side 24/7. I decided to give the second year a try, but I wanted to try something different - doing something I liked. I volunteered at a legal aid office, got involved in some of the school organizations, and joined one of the school's legal clinics. It made my experience a lot better because I found that I actually cared about what I was doing.

So if you want any advice, I would say tough out that first year, and then think about what initially interested you in law school. From there, pursue activities, organizations, and opportunities that relate to those initial reasons for going.

I wasn't thrilled when Brady Hoke was hired, especially with all the big names being thrown around. I found that I was extremely frustrated, however, when reading reactions from the traditional media outlets and former players.

It is great that these two factions are now once again "all in" for Michigan, but where were they during the RichRod era? Why couldn't they give the same support? Now, Braylon Edwards and Michael Rosenberg are telling me that I am supposed to be excited about this hire and "all in" for the team. It's ridiculous.

If the likes of Cato June and Aaron Shea really support Michigan, they should have done so through thick and thin, regardless of who the coach was. Yet, because it was not Michigan football the way they wanted it to be, they decide who they should support, and I am supposed to blindly follow.

Whether alluded to or bluntly stated, I hear a lot of people saying that they want things back to the way they were with Coach Carr. It seems people remember what he did differently from me because I recall a 1-5 record against Tressel, a traditional Rose Bowl demolishing, and an inability to stop a running quarterback. I was excited Michigan decided to take a step in a new direction that would finally address these problems.

I do not necessarily think RichRod was the right person for the job given the on-field results and the numerous player transfers, but I continue to wonder "what if" when it comes to the support he should have received from these two factions that were so opposed to him from Day 1. Maybe it would not have changed anything, but I would have liked to see what could have happened.

I want to support this hire, and I will in time, but everytime I see another former player or reporter telling me how much I should like this decision, I have a harder time doing so.

I don't think you are really remembering the main issue us "idiots" had. Most of the outrage was over the lack of communication between the coaching staff and the admissions staff. The issue I and many others seemed to have was that he was cleared to receive a LOI by more than just the coaching staff. Then in June he found out he was not going to be accepted here based on an admissions decision.

For me, it is the first Michigan loss I can remember - vs. Colorado in 1994. It was the first time I ever cried after a loss.

After the game, my dad took me to the park to blow off some steam. As we were leaving the parking lot, some kid had left his bike behind our car, and we ran it over as we were backing out. I was able to keep it together as the kid was crying, but I felt bad for both my dad and the kid.

When you talk about Dwayne Wade being an automatic plug-in over Rip, do you mean over the long-term or during our championship season? If it is over the long-term, then I do not disagree, but for the 2003-2004 season:

Throw in the fact that Rip's offensive game wore down the other team's SG or SF, and I do not think Wade is a tier above for that season.

Also, what made the Pistons a unique championship team is that they really lacked a superstar. They played basketball as a team and focused on defense. A rookie like Carmelo or Bosh would be talented, but from a chemistry standpoint, it could screw up the entire team (e.g. Carmelo complaining that Larry Brown was too hard on him, wanting more minutes, etc.).

While I appreciate your attempt to give us perspective on this, you seem to be missing the main point.

The frustration/disappointment/other negative feeling many of us have for our university right now almost entirely is based on how this situation has been handled. We made him an offer, he accepted and qualified, and now we might not be letting him in. Not only that, but we are keeping him in the dark about what his current status is.

Sure we want to see him on the football field this fall, but if this were any other student, and not an athlete, I would feel just as bad for him/her. I just haven't learned of the University handling any other student's enrollment like this.

I find no hypocrisy in a position that wants the University to fulfill its end of the bargain, after Dorsey fulfilled his. If we allow Dorsey in, we will still be a strong academic institution. One student-athlete, deserving of a second chance, does not change that.